From squirrel@echelon.alias.net Wed Mar 17 18:00:10 1999
Path: newscene.newscene.com!novia!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!peerfeed.ncal.verio.net!news.he.net!news.lava.net!anon.lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net!mail2news-x2!mail2news
Date: 18 Mar 1999 01:00:10 -0000
Subject: FZ BIBLE 34/35 SOLUTION TO ENTRAPMENT 9TH ACC
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.clearing.technology
From: Secret Squirrel <squirrel@echelon.alias.net>
Comments: Please report problems with this automated remailing service to
	<squirrel-admin@echelon.alias.net>. The message sender's identity
	is unknown, unlogged, and not replyable.
Message-ID: <aa3008e177c190bee5430045580028a9@anonymous.poster>
Mail-To-News-Contact: postmaster@nym.alias.net
Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net
Lines: 1148
Xref: newscene.newscene.com alt.religion.scientology:690397 alt.clearing.technology:76259

FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST

9th ACC - THE SOLUTION TO ENTRAPMENT CASSETTES 34/35

Our purpose is to promote religious freedom and the Scientology
Religion by spreading the Scientology Tech across the internet.

The Cof$ abusively suppresses the practice and use of
Scientology Tech by FreeZone Scientologists.  It misuses the
copyright laws as part of its suppression of religious freedom.

The writings of LRH form our Old Testament just as the writings
of Judiasm form the Old Testament of Christianity.

We might not be good and obedient Scientologists according
to the definitions of the Cof$ whom we are in protest against.

But the Christians are not good and obedient Jews and yet
are allowed to have their old testament regardless of any
Jewish opinion.

We ask for the same rights, namely to practice our religion
as we see fit and to have access to our holy scriptures
without fear of the Cof$ copyright terrorists.

We ask for others to help in our fight.  Even if you do
not believe in Scientology or the Scientology Tech, we hope
that you do believe in religious freedom and will choose
to aid us for that reason.

Thank You,

The FZ Bible Association

**************************************************


9TH ACC CONTENTS

December 1954 to January 1955 in Phoenix, Arizona.

Based on the solution to entrappment cassette version.

F# = File number (** = not available)
O# = Original Number (according to the master list posted by Pilot)
REN = As renumbered in the Solution to Entrappment cassettes

F# O#  REN  DATE  TITLE

01  1   1  Dec  6 Introduction to 9th ACC: Havingness
02  2   2  Dec  7 The Essence of Auditing, Know to Mystery Scale
03  3   3  Dec  8 Rundown on Six Basics
04  4   4  Dec  9 Communication Formula
05  5   5  Dec 10 The Practice of Dianetics and Scientology
06  6   6  Dec 13 Conduct of the Auditor
07  7   7  Dec 14 Mechanics of Communication
08  8   8  Dec 15 Havingness
09  9   9  Dec 16 Pan-determinism and One-way Flows
10  9A 10  Dec 17 Hist. & Dev. of Processes: Games & Limitations in Games
11  9B 10A Dec 17 History and Development of Processes: Q&A Period
12 10  11  Dec 20 Games (Fighting)
13 11  12  Dec 21 Anatomy of Games -- Part I
14 11A 12A Dec 21 Anatomy of Games -- Part II
15 12  13  Dec 22 One-way Flows in Processing
16 12A 13A Dec 22 One-way Flows in Processing: Question and Answer Period
17 13  14  Dec 23 Havingness and Communication Formulas
** 13A --  Dec 23 After Lecture Comments   
18 14  15  Dec 24 Pan-determinism
19 14A 15A Dec 24 Pan-determinism: Question and Answer Period
20 15  16  Dec 27 Training New People
** 15A --  Dec 27 Curiosa from Dianetics 55!
21 16  17  Jan  3 Auditing Requirements, Differences
22 16A 18  Jan  4 Time
** 16AA -  Jan  4 Q&A Period
23 17  19  Jan  5 Auditing at Optimum
24 18  20  Jan  6 Exteriorization
25 19  21  Jan  7 Elementary Material: Know to Mystery Scale
26 20  22  Jan 10 Education: Goals in Society -- Adult Education
27 21  23  Jan 11 Fundamentals of Auditing
** 21A --  Jan 11 Auditors' Conference
28 22  24  Jan 12 Definitions: Glossary of Terms -- Part I
29 23  25  Jan 13 Definitions: Glossary of Terms -- Part II
30 24  26  Jan 14 Definitions: Glossary of Terms -- Part III
31 25  27  Jan 17 Auditing Demonstration: Six Basics in Action
** 25A --  Jan 17 Auditors' Conference
32 26  28  Jan 18 Auditing Demonstration: Spotting Spots
** 26A --  Jan 18 Auditors' Conference
33 27  29  Jan 19 Auditing Demonstration: Exteriorization
34 28  30  Jan 20 Background Music to Living
35 29  31  Jan 21 Axioms: Laws of Consideration -- What an Axiom Is

Note that 6 of the 9 discussion periods (Q&A periods, Auditors'
Conferences, etc.) were omitted from the cassettes, leaving us
with only 35 files instead of the 41 that were recorded.  It is
also possible that material was edited out of the lectures which
are available.  If anyone has a set of the original reels, please
post any missing material.

========================

9ACC file 34/35

9th ACC 28 (30) - BACKGROUND MUSIC TO LIVING

Transcript of Lecture by L. Ron Hubbard 9ACC28     -    
5501C20 Renumbered 30 for "The Solution To Entrapment"
cassettes

BACKGROUND MUSIC TO LIVING

A lecture given on 20 January 1955


I want to tell you something about the human mind. The
human mind thinks of something, it doesn't get acknowledged
and it gets solid. You got that? 

Male voice: Yeah. 

The human mind thinks of something, it doesn't get
acknowledged, it gets solid. You got this real clean now?
And I'll go over this again. The human mind thinks of
something, it doesn't get acknowledged and it gets solid.
What then is mass? 

Male voice: Condensed thought. 

What is it? 

Audience: Unacknowledged thought. 

Audience: It's a solidified unacknowledged thought. The 
human mind is solid.

Okay. What is memory? 

Audience: No acknowledgment. The human mind. The mind. 

What's memory? 

Audience: Facsimiles. Unacknowledgment. For me, the massing 
of moments into this solidity.

I'll give you the fullest definition of memory that you
could grasp here right at the moment and which is
observably true: the MEST universe.

Male voice: A bad accident. 

You got it? 

Male voice: Yes.

All right, the human mind thinks a thought, it doesn't get
acknowledged, gets solid. You've got a mass, which is
actually a thought, so that we have this idea about it,
that it is remembering.

Now, let's go over that. That this is remembering.

The human mind thinks a thought, doesn't get acknowledged
and there's that thought - solid. So then we think of this
mass as remembering.

Male voice: It's a record or something. 

It's a record, that's right. This is the basic anatomy of 
the entire facsimile system.

All right. Now, we get smart, clever and significant and we
do these things up so they will remember more easily. Get
the idea?

Now, for instance, that wall has only one thought. It says,
"I'm a wall located at 401A East Roosevelt, Phoenix,
Arizona." You got the idea?

Well now, it could be several consecutive thoughts
consolidated to make that wall. Just take the various parts
that go into the wall; take the various thoughts that have
been thought to make the solidities and to park them and to
move them around and condense them and build them and
construct them. And we've got a whole series of thoughts
which are being represented by it.

All right. Then the more you would think of something
without getting acknowledged, the solider it would get. Is
this right?

Female voice: Yup.

The more you would think of something without getting it
acknowledged, the solider it would get. Therefore,
self-auditing doesn't work. See that? It's the only reason
self-auditing doesn't work. Oh, I beg your pardon, it is
the only reason that self-auditing doesn't work well, but
it's remediable actually.

Now, let's look at this mechanism. Now, an auditor sits up
there in front of a preclear and monitors his somatic strip
and file clerk and shoves all around these memory masses
and they echo to the auditor but not to what the preclear
thinks. This is curious, isn't it? All right. Now, if
that's the case, then an individual should be able to
handle his bank much more ably by putting a thinking
machine, which is himself an ordering machine or a command
machine or just a commanding spot, out in front of himself
someplace and give himself an order. And that order ought
to work better.

The auditor sitting out in front of the preclear has better
control of the somatic strip and the file clerk than the
preclear. So, therefore, all a preclear would have to do is
to put a spot out there where the auditor would normally
sit and simply give the somatic strip orders and the file
clerk orders and the masses orders in general and they
would obey, wouldn't they? And so they do.

So anybody trying to think inside of his head is being a
schnook because the body doesn't obey commands easily which
are given inside the head.

I'll say that again. The auditor sits out in front - and we
know this from 1950 - and gives that somatic strip and energy
masses and facsimiles and engrams all kinds of orders and
they do that. But the preclear sitting by himself can't do
that. So he's very mystified, very mystified. All right,
this means that an external control - this is all this
means - that an external control of this mechanism is more
feasible than an internal control of the mechanism. So an
individual exteriorized can then tell his body to get well
and it will get well. But an individual interiorized says,
"Get well," and the body just closes in on him because
something is thinking a thought in there, and it's hungry
for thoughts.

Now, if you thought a thought and it didn't get
acknowledged and it got solid, and then you thought the
thought again, what's likely to happen?

Female voice: More solidity.

Hm?

Female voice: More solidity, more mass.

Well, that's true, except this time it will get
acknowledged by the first mass. That's restimulation.

And I'll go over that again. Do you see that? You think a
thought, it doesn't get acknowledged, it gets solid. All
right. Now, we think a thought - the same thought again -
only remember we're kind of hungry by this time for an
acknowledgment and so we acknowledge it with the first mass.

Do you get the idea? We use a mechanical answering
mechanism or acknowledging mechanism, you see? So that is
restimulation. There is no mystery about what
restimulation is.

Restimulation is the body or the individual himself
acknowledging with mass what he just thought.

Female voice: That would account for pictures, like I 
was getting.

Oh, this sure accounts for pictures. You've said it.

Female voice: That's the echo.

All right.

Now, we know that this is a universe of two, not a universe
of one. This is very curious. This is a universe of two,
not a universe of one. This is real cute. This universe
starts with a unit of two. Actually, when you even try to
build it geometrically it has to start with the unit of
two, not with a unit of one. If you start to build the mass
of this universe with this unit of one, you get no place
because one doesn't have an outside and an inside. See,
since you got an outside and an inside, you got two. The
second you get two, you start to get interaction. We see
this now? Real clear? It's a universe of two. I give you
Buckminster Fuller, if I remember. 

Female voice: Oh, you remember that night he came in?

Oh, that wonderful demonstration of building tetrahedrons,
and so forth. Exactly what geometric shapes does it take to
build space. And he went on and on and on. A fascinating
demonstration. And he made it adequately clear that the
basic unit of structure of this universe or for any solid
was two, not one. So you start with two, not one. Papa and
Mama. You get the idea?

Now, an individual who decides to be Papa and Mama
simultaneously gets mixed up, doesn't he?

Male voice: Well, how about if you could actually hold two
points apart when you process him?

Oh well, if he's holding two points apart and saying this
is papa and this is mama, he's in the swing. There's
nothing wrong with that.

But an individual who thinks that he can be only one in
this universe is perforce very aberrated indeed. He's got
to have two. So we get the auditor and preclear combination
working out very handsomely.

We get a thetan and the body working out fairly well. But a
guy interiorized thinking he's the body and is only one
walking around, he doesn't function worth a nickel. In
fact, he's Homo sapiens. I would go so far as to say that a
Homo sapiens was an interiorized individual. And more or
less what we define as Homo sapiens - it's never been
defined. It means a guy who is savvy; somebody who could
think. So let's just push it on over to somebody who
figure-figures, and this would be a guy who is interiorized.

You can handle something with direct communication as long
as you're in one place and it's in another place. But when
you are in the same place it is, you'll have a little
difficulty handling it.

I ran an experiment - which is what I'm telling you about -
of an individual remedying havingness on himself He sat
inside his head and tried to remedy havingness on the body.
This was a gorgeous boo-boo. This was horrible to behold
because he was inside of his head trying to handle masses,
and this was very difficult, so he couldn't get out. He was
a nonexteriorizable - you know, completely impossible, you
know, this type of case - utterly convinced that he couldn't
get out.

And so I had him put up a spot where an auditor would be
and start handling his bank. Well, he hadn't had much
auditing, so this didn't count as far as a restimulation of
an auditor is concerned. And he can put that spot out there
and have him - you know, have the spot have him mock up
things and pull them in, and he got brilliant
three-dimensional, solid density mockups. Something that
was utterly impossible for this individual to get before.

So we would simply go so far as to say that a black case
was somebody who was trying to handle things from inside a
mass. That he was trying to handle a mass from inside the
mass, not outside of it, and himself believes that he is
this mass to some degree. Now, we would say that would be
an occluded case.

Now, the funny part of it is it ceases to be an occluded
case the moment you could even get him to start putting new
rings of occlusion around. If he happens to slide outside,
as a preclear did in a class demonstration one day, to make
sure that he just put a new sphere of blackness around his
original sphere of blackness, he all of a sudden is
exteriorized and on his way from there on out. You get the
idea. He's simply taken a new position.

The esoteric value of exteriorization may be very great,
very probably very great - the aesthetic value. But I'm
afraid we're dealing here with nothing but geometrics;
nothing more solemn than geometrics.

It takes two to make a universe; it takes two to produce
action; it takes two to produce time.

Do you know that time is absent in the presence of one and
the absence of any other. It is the co-motion of particles.
Well, that certainly takes two to co- . You're not going to
co- on one. Some people try.

So, you get this fellow who gets this "only one"
computation. He's inside trying to figure and handle his
body. Being the body and trying to handle his body, he
immediately runs out of time. This is one of the weirdest
manifestations you ever saw. This fellow presses time, has
trouble with time, is upset about time and so forth.

Now, if things have become so unreal to this individual
that he is sure of himself where he is but is not sure
anybody else is present, of course, we almost have a gone
time problem. Then this individual, of course, cannot move
easily out of facsimiles and incidents, can he? He can't
easily move these masses around. Why, he's inside and it
takes a co-motion of particles to have time. So the timing
of the particles goes haywire because there is no time
being made. So, the only time there would be a couple of
old engrams. And these things have their own position in
time. So when he gets those in restimulation, why, he's
stuck in some other time.

The actual truth of an individual having trouble with
time - it's not what wall? but what hour? what day? what
month? what year? There is his real trouble. What time is
it? A "gone o'clock" case. This type of action, then, is
simply produced by the single position. And the
individuality, the unity of the per  whatever you want to
call it - mono-, mono-ality of the individual - it's an old
Greek word - the monality (I'm translating it more literally
into English), the monality of this individual forbids him
to have time. Isn't that cute? So when somebody begins to
play the "only one," his time track goes haywire. Why? He's
starting to count on it to have time it's because the only
particles around - the old facsimiles and so on - but they
each have their own time so he gets stuck all over the time
track.

Now, do we get the manifestation there? Do you see how that
would be? He'd have to have two particles to make time.

He'd have to be - at least have to be outside looking at the
body in order to have a co-action of particles which would
furnish new time for him, so that he would then not have to
depend upon old facsimiles moving around to give him a
sense of time. You follow me?

So, once more the monality of the individual is discovered
to be a highly aberrated factor.

All right. Now, let's go over this again. Let's go over
this again. A fellow thinks a thought; the thought doesn't
get acknowledged; it becomes solid. Therefore, a solid mass
could be said to be a memory. Any solid mass could be said
to be a memory. Solid masses are memories. Space, less so.
All right, that's just something for the masses to be in.

All right. Now, we got this clean? All right. Now, that
means that solidities are memories. Now, what is a memory?
It's an unacknowledged thought. If you want to accumulate a
lot of mass, make sure you don't get acknowledged.

All right, next thing. The individual has thought a
thought, it hasn't been acknowledged and he's got a mass.
Got that? All right. Now, he thinks another thought,
there's nobody around to acknowledge this thought so he
acknowledges it himself with his first mass. He thinks a
similar thought and that first mass will answer this as the
acknowledgment. In other words, he gets a solid acknowledgment.

Female voice: That's a good idea.

Well, sure.

Female voice: That's a good idea. Well, sure. That's a fine 
idea.

All right, that's a wonderful idea. The only difficulty
with this idea is, that is restimulation. You got that?
That is restimulation. Now, after we get a heck of a lot of
masses around, of course, we get interactions which are
quite peculiar. We get a thought thought and a mass, not
acknowledged by the mass, and so we get a picture of the
mass. Now, we think a thought, the wall. The wall doesn't
acknowledge, so we get a picture of the wall. See that? So
we got a facsimile.

Now, that is masses merely interacting with masses.
Actually, that wall is a thought, so you get a copy of the
original thought, but the only reason you get a copy is
because the wall didn't really acknowledge. So an
individual just keeps picking up mass, mass and more mass
until he's a mass.

Okay, now let's take a fast look at this. We've accounted
for, one, the physical universe, which is a memory. We've
accounted for, two, restimulation.

All right. Now, let's account for mono-ality - monality -
horrible stuff Individual, all by himself, is trying to
command a mass while in it and thinking he is it. See,
he's in it and he thinks he is it and he's trying to
command it. How can he command it since there will be no
time for the command to take place in?

All right. Now, how do we get that? Time is the co-motion
of particles. To have a co- you have to have two. If the
individual is sitting in a gorgeous state of monogamy - that
means just one present, doesn't it - the wife or the husband.
If he's sitting in a gorgeous state of monality, we
discover, then, this boy is operating in a no-time bracket.
So how can he command the body except by picking up old
memories which did have time. So he starts handling the
body with masses and facsimiles. You see that?

Well, these things get keyed-in and they have their own
time factor. It says 1776 right down there on the corner of
that facsimile, see. And so it is 1776. And after a while
he loses present time with the greatest of ease. Why? He
doesn't have a present time as long as he is inside a mass,
which he thinks he is, trying to handle the mass which he's
inside of The reason he can't handle it is there's no time
in which to handle it, and this is the first thing he will
tell you. He doesn't have any time to do anything. Well, of
course he doesn't have any time because there's only one of
him there.

All right. His reality usually is poor enough so that he
doesn't clearly recognize the existence of somebody else.
But he would have to handle others without being able to
handle himself He would expect from them to handle him
then. You see, he would expect them to handle him. You see,
he's inside, stuck. And they're inside, stuck. So he could
give them orders and they can give him orders because the
existence of the two of them there - if their reality is not
so bad that they can still recognize that somebody else is
present - why, then, you see, it is a very simple thing. They
just get along splendidly. One of them gives the other one
orders and that other one gives this fellow orders and they
can handle each other. But they're not handling themselves.

This is what's known as "duo foul-up determinism."

All right. This, of course, is inherent in the
communication formula. An individual who has lost to some
degree the ability to duplicate himself you know, and to
have a duplicate out there, then, can't have time. If he's
lost this he's lost time. Why has he lost this? Because he
has lost time. It's one of those snake-eating-his-tail
propositions, you know, where one is proved by the other,
and the other, back and forth. You see, the reason he can't
handle or control himself is he doesn't have any time in
which to do it because he doesn't have two particles. He
doesn't have the ability to duplicate himself he thinks. So
therefore, if he doesn't have the ability to duplicate
himself there is no time in which to handle it unless he's
with somebody else and is ordering them and they're
ordering him.

Okay. So we take an exterior order on the part of an
auditor, and he finds that the somatic strip and the file
clerk go immediately and obediently under control. What a
pipe. An auditor who doesn't recognize this clearly, that
in dealing with people who are not exteriorized, he
actually can say, "Well, now, let's see. The file clerk
will make you desperately ill and the somatic strip will
move you." And it's liable to happen without the victim
being able to do anything about it at all. This is why PDH
and other things like that work.

All right. He, then, is in command of this other person's
file clerk and somatic strip. In other words, in control of
this person. Because this person is handling things with
masses. Memories become masses and the individual handles
himself with memories which are all mistimed. So his time
track gets all fouled up, naturally.

All right. This being the case, then it should be possible
for an individual simply to mock up a spot somewhere
outside the body and have that spot then give him auditing
commands which would remedy his havingness and do
everything else.

And sure enough this can take place. The individual,
sitting inside of his body, being his body and auditing his
body at the same time, cannot accomplish any auditing
beyond chewing up energy masses. You understand that? He's
not giving commands, really, to this body at all. He's
merely taking old energy masses and pushing them in on top
of old energy masses until he looks something on the order
of an old clothes bag. You see what he's doing?

But the moment he put a spot out there and had the spot
give him orders, he would find that he would obey them.
Oh, but they're his orders, aren't they? No, they're not
his orders, they're the spot's orders. Oh, but he gave them
to him originally. That doesn't matter; there are two
present. Basic unit of the universe is two.

What's the name of that? Dymaxion geometry isn't it?
Buckminster Fuller's dymaxion geometry. Gorgeous, just
utterly gorgeous in it's demonstration; tetrahedrons and
octahedrons, and so forth. Well, the basic unit is two,
certainly. If you don't have two, you don't have a
universe. There is a process known as, "What could occupy
the same space as you're occupying." Remember that process?

All right. The second that you don't have two spots
occupying the same space you've got no universe. So 
individuals, in their anxiety to have universes, are 
so thoroughly holding on to the universe memory - which 
imposes position - become very afraid of disturbing this 
arrangement at all and so get stuck in the past, and so 
forth. They get afraid of disarranging masses. So you ask 
this fellow, "What wouldn't you mind occupying the same 
space with?" And he has a horrible time. But he finally 
finds something he wouldn't mind occupying the same
space with.

Well, you see, basically he knew this - that he had to be two
in order to get anything done. See, he knew he had to be
two in order to have any time. And you've just asked him to
be one with something. Well, what happened? His memory of
trying to be two all the time has finally wound up in some
other species of duality. See, it's gotten way off the deep.

Now, his oneness has been resisted in an effort to make
twoness until he got oneness. See, he resisted oneness so
long that he's now oneness. And the biggest swindle that
anybody ever tried to impose upon man was "unity,"
"singularity," "one-ity."

You see? "One God." And then they promptly write in all
their books, "Two Gods." The God of good and the God of evil.

Male voice: One nation.

Yes.

Male voice: Indivisible.

One nation indivisible with the Democrats and the Republicans.

All right, we've got one. One, one, one, one, one, one,
one, and so on, all the way along the line. Got to be two.

Now, I'll give you an example today of something which is
quite curious. We no longer have one science. Trying to
give the public the - not you, but the public - the reason why
we have two sciences is very, very difficult indeed because
it's a technical reason. There can't be one science. So we
can break it down and say, well, there's Dianetics which is
the material side of life, and then there's Scientology
which is the spiritual side of life.

And this makes a duality and actually people are much
happier with this. You'll find people don't know anything
much about either one of them, arguing violently in favor
of one and violently in favor of the other - the Blues and
the Greens. You get the idea?

They argue. They say, "Dianetics was really good, really
good. This Scientology is no good at all." "Scientology is
really the stuff; but Dianetics is no good." Well, fine.
It's just a discharge between two points. If they get mad
at one, they can always go over to the other one. Well,
what if we just had Scientology? If they got mad at that,
they're trapped. You got the idea there?

All right. This duality then makes for saner organization
in spite of the fact that the boys keep trying to get a
joint-control council which would then manage with one
board all existing corporations. No, it's the most
wonderful thing you ever saw how the animosities, and so
forth, of either side of this organization discharge
against the other side.

Now, there was an outfit one time called the Holy Roman
Empire, and that was preceded by an organization known as
the Roman Empire. It didn't go batty and become the Holy
Roman Empire, which was an empire in psychosis, it had
dropped squarely through every single step of the Tone
Scale before it hit the Holy Roman Empire.

That's, by the way, history, not my prejudice talk - I've got
no prejudice about that one way or the other. You may get
the idea sometime I have very definite prejudices. I don't
have prejudices, I have belly laughs.

Where the Roman Empire is concerned, there's been one
writer back on the track who utterly fascinates me with the
speed and twists of his paragraphs and so on, and the
motion of his words at large and his thoughts. And that
happens to be Edward Gibbon. And Edward Gibbon is very
amusing anyhow because here is the most violently
anti-Christian book you ever saw in your life. Here is a
book which just froths on the subject of Christianity but
does it under a satirical, ironic level, which is for sale
in every Christian bookstore in the land because nobody's
ever read it.

And there it sits - they all know it's a classic and they
all know this is very good, but it takes the dimmest
findings - the only thing it does is take the dimmest
findings and the earliest beginnings of the Roman Catholic
Church - Christiamty at large - and then just proceeds, page 
by page, chapter by chapter, to paint a blacker and more
wicked and more vicious picture of this. It's gorgeous. I
don't know how it possibly could have survived in
Christian society since 1790, but it has. It's quite a
triumph.

The triumph is occasioned by its being unreadable for the
most part. Most people don't read it; they look at the
paragraphs and they're too long and the words are big, and
so forth. I remember when I first tackled it I said, "Well,
there's one thing I haven't done in this life which I'm
going to do before I get a pair of oars, and that's - I'm
going to read Edward Gibbon from cover to cover." I didn't
know anything about this. This is two years ago.

I started plowing along into Gibbon. Believe me, it was
plow. I remember every once in a while I felt like calling
for a bulldozer for awhile because typical of the
18th-century writer, he starts slowly and then proceeds to
get nowhere in a leisurely fashion.

And I swear about, oh, I don't know, fifteen or twenty
chapters deep, just plowing, till all of a sudden the man
started to wake up and I saw what he was getting at. And he
was getting very solidly at just this one thing. This
mock-up called Christianity was the biggest roar that had
ever come upon the stage. And that book is alive today in
the bookstores. He proves it. He proves it with their own
documents.

All right. What was wrong with this cockeyed organization
in the first place? There was something wrong - this is not
Gibbon now, that's a little side pass - there's something
very definitely wrong with the Roman Empire. Gibbon says
what was wrong there, but he doesn't recognize the point
from which it stems.

The point is this "oneness." Gibbon, in one very long and
involved and extremely well-written paragraph, says the
trouble with the Roman Empire was nobody had anyplace to
run. You couldn't go anywhere. You were in the Roman Empire
and that was that. And if you went out to the barbaric
boundaries you found people who were wearing smelly skins,
eating rats with butter on one border - and no man of any
kind of civilized digestion could even vaguely tolerate
that - you went in another direction and you were amongst
cannibals.

There was no civilization that the Roman Empire did not
embrace, and it was the total world. And if a man got in
bad with the Holy Roman Empire, he was a dog forevermore.
The only thing he could do was revolt the government of
the Roman Empire. He could turn it over. And that's what a
thetan starts to do when he decides he is the only one in
the body there. The only way he can get any surcease or
change in this body, or his kidney or his heart or his 
liver can get any slightest justice, is by revolution. 
You see that?

So this oneness leads to revolution, and we wonder why in
the name of God, God had such a rough time amongst the
Christians. We wonder about this. We don't have to wonder
very darned long. We find out that there was - they were
always trying to make two organizations.

And they would have greater or lesser success. But then as
soon as one organization became dominant it would eat up
the other organization, go for a short time and then, bang,
you have to have a revolution and two more organizations.

Now, the psychiatrist railing against schizophrenia -
which he, by the way, can't define anymore. I asked a
psychiatrist, a very well educated one, not too long ago,
exactly what schizophrenia was, and he gave me the 
old-time definition for dementia praecox. And I pointed this
out to him, that he had actually defined dementia praecox,
and he said to me, "Yes, that's what we call schizophrenia
today." And I made him aware of the fact that, schiz,
schizo, schizoid and the rest of it had to do with
scissors, meaning a split personality. A duality. And he
said, "Oh, that's - probably was the word, but that's been
used like that for a long while." The only truth in
psychiatry has gone by the boards, that people can have
dual or more dementia. All right. They don't even think
this could occur anymore, I guess. They are trying very
hard to get everybody to be one person. And they revolted
against any duality of personality. And you will find in
Karl Meningitis's book, The Human Mind, a popular text, he
said. I don't know what it's a text of. It's a collection of
observations of psychotics with some comments by the
author. Hardly a textbook, hardly popular. But it was the
only book out at the time with the title The Human Mind, so
it sold well. Nyar-meow.

Anyway, he points out, he points out there that we had a
very horrible fellow in this sanitarium. He was a perfectly
charming fellow, and he was getting along fine with
everybody and he had a lot of charm about him. But at one
moment he was writing a very loving and affectionate letter
to his wife and his family, and by the way, he was not - had
not left them destitute; he was simply at this sanitarium
to get perked up a little bit; too many drinks or
something - and the next moment he was writing one to a girl
friend. And the horror with which Karl Meningitis points
out that this boy was leading two lives is interesting to
observe unless one recognizes this tremendous overwhelming
impulse toward oneness. See? So, psychiatry itself has
backed off from the idea that a person could wear two hats.

Actually, I've traced various careers and I've found out
that people were the best people at the time they were
wearing a half-a-dozen hats, at least half-a-dozen, you
see. Two or more - all this is. And when they were only
wearing two hats they were having a little bit of trouble;
and when they started wearing one, you might as well have
taken them out and shot them.

Actually, they began to have no time. That's the most
curious thing in the world. They have no time. Yet if you
carefully traced over the man's day you would find out that
he had nothing but time during the whole day. This is the
result of wearing one hat.

You'd be amazed - auditors have stopped revolting - maybe out
of apathy, I hope not - against the idea that an auditor
ought to have a couple of hats. He should wear with perfect
aplomb the role of a psychotherapist and the role of a
minister. With perfect aplomb he should wear these two hats
with the greatest of ease. And certainly he should be able
to wear the third hat - the role of an educator. These are
the solidified labels of the society today for healing,
teaching and spreading the good word in general, you see?
So it would - you'd actually have to have three or four good,
solid labels in order to get anywhere.

If you go out and you say, "Well, now I am going to be just
a psychotherapist, that's all I'm going to be." And you'll
find all of a sudden one day you'll reach back there into
your quiver and it's empty; and there come all those
doggone Norman knights.

There's supposed to be something faintly bad about wearing
a couple of hats, you know. It's a little bit declasse.
It's something you really shouldn't do. What you should do
is to be bold and honest and stand up forthrightly wearing
exactly one label. Well, I'll tell you the label people
will eventually wear if they start to wear just one label.
It's spelled g-o-d. Only no such God could possibly exist
because he would have gone batty long ago. He would have
had no time and could control nothing. One - never. When the
Christian church said that the devil had been banished or
gave people to understand that he was no longer in
business, they did a very bum turn for themselves. You
could always go and worship the devil and at least that was
worshipping something. Whereas if people could no longer
worship a good God - devil merely means "little God," by
the way - if you could no longer go and worship the good God,
then the thing to do was to just back off from the whole
thing. Whereas the social activity of the community might
still be revolving around this single deity.

A nation and a civilization is as well off as it has many
gods. I one day adventured interestingly upon the
codification of the pantheon of modern America, pantheon
of modern America. Who were and what were the gods
worshipped today. And of course, they're the obvious ones,
the very obvious ones.

The God - well, one of the first gods that is worshipped,
uniformly and without much thought about it by the country
at large, is "Luck," Lady Luck. She is worshipped. Another
one, not called by that name very often but occasionally
called by that name, Mammon, the god of wealth and gold.

There's a great many cults of various kinds. There's a cult
known as Wall Street. And they even have god symbols. They
have a bull and a bear. And they join in two cults there
worshipping the same god.

So you get these things - it's very amusing. You break it
down and you find out there's a pantheon in the United
States. You find out the mechanics out here rather worship
at the feet of one motor company or another. This fellow's
all sold on Lincoln-Mercury-Ford, you see, and this other
fellow, he's a GE man, and so forth. Their gods are pretty
solid, but they're gods just the same.

These aren't just preferences. If GE puts out to one of its
GE men the fact that this new torquo-dynamic distributor
potboiler is the greatest thing that ever rolled up a
window he ever heard of; he will tell every customer he has
that this torquo-gimmegahoojit is the thing. And if
Lincoln-Mercury put out the same thing under a different
title and said this was the thing, this fellow would know
it wouldn't work and it would be no good, that he doesn't
worship at that cult. Amazing. Amazing. Their gods are solid.

Female voice: But there are two.

Oh, yes, yes. They very carefully have different gods. And
the reason they have different gods is because they can't
possibly exist under a - what do you call it - monodeistic
system. It can't happen, can't happen. The second that you
told the public that it now had to bow down only to this
altar, you would immediately get a number of the public
saying, "Well, there's this altar over here." Well, there
wasn't one until they were told to bow down to that one
altar. You get the idea? So we always have to have a couple
of terminals to get any discharge or action or time in this
universe.

Now, as far as we're concerned, us guys right here, what
we're mainly concerned with is time. Because when the
individual can no longer make time, he no longer has any
choice but to key in and restimulate engrams. You
understand? See, this is his choice. He either makes time
or keys in.

Now, we know very well from our experience what we can
object to and clear up in somebody's head who isn't hitting
on all cylinders. It's the handling of things with
facsimiles and engrams. And if they're handling things with
facsimiles and engrams, then they must be living under a
monodeistic individuality. They are themselves; they are no
other person. They have this mechanically. They have no
point out here or three feet in back of their head which is
somebody else.

Actually, a psychotic will get so bad off at times that he
will actually bypass all rationality to have a witch or a
spirit or something walking around with him all the time,
see. He'll have another point over there that's giving him
all the orders. The ease with which an individual under
hypnosis will put the great god Throgmagog (Dianetics:
Evolution of a Science) out here and have it do all of his
thinking for him is wonderful to behold. Oh, he does it
with the greatest of ease.

Now, I ran across this here in a demonstration a couple of
days ago where I told her to put a thinking machine out
there several times. You remember my doing that? A very
momentary flip on the line. One of the darnedest things you
can ask a preclear to do is to think a thought three feet
in back of his head. See, he's interiorized, and you ask
him to think this thought three feet back of his head. It
doesn't matter what kind of a thought as long as he thinks
that thought three feet back of his head which might be, "I
have a cat," you know, or "I am a man." Just as long as he
thinks this thought, no matter what it is, three feet back
of his head.

Now you have him think this thought in different positions,
each time yourself acknowledging the fact that he has
thought that thought, you see? And he very often will run
the most fantastic obsession out to be in his head so he
can use his brain. You get the idea? He's so fixed on the
idea that all the thinkingness happens in the skull that if
you make him put thinking out there, he then gets much more
willing to exteriorize. Why does he get willing to
exteriorize? Hm?

Male voice: To have a place to think at.

The damn fool thinks you have to think with something.
Well, now obviously if you have to think with something,
he must be just completely beaten down on the subject of
thinking a thought and then not getting it acknowledged,
you see? 

Male voice: A little 8-C. 

Yeah. Well, the way a thetan interiorizes is to think a 
thought at the body or put a beam on the body, and then 
the body doesn't pay any attention to him at all. And he 
has a tendency to interiorize into it, of course. He's 
outside; there's no acknowledgment from the body and so 
he interiorizes.

What does he use for his acknowledgment? What does he use
for his acknowledgment? 

Female voice: Mass.

Mass! What is the mass present? 

Female voice: The body.

The body! And so he interiorizes. He brings in the body for
an acknowledgment.

All he'd have to do is - all you have to do is acknowledge it
or put an acknowledgment up there and he would exteriorize.
And yet nearly everybody on the track has waited for this
body - you know, there's a body out there; there's a hunter
or a dog or something out there - and then he puts a beam
on it, you know. He says, "Nyah," or something of the sort,
and "Don't do that," or "Go away," or "Do something," you
know. And this body pays him no attention whatsoever, so he
brings in the body for an acknowledgment. Spat! And so goes
inside and thinks, well - . You get the idea, "How did I get
in here? What's this all about?" Reasons, reasons, figure,
figure. And of course the more he figures the more he
restimulates that body because he's thinking in one unit
position. He'd have to get back outside again in order to
get himself shaped up so that he could order that body
around. You see?

Now therefore, exteriorization is solved just directly on
acknowledgments. But the funny part of it is, is an
individual isn't just at length interiorized only into a
body; he's interiorized into a universe, into space, into
masses, into secondary bodies, into engrams and facsimiles
and into the body he's sitting in. So we just run this
backwards and we will get him on out. He will certainly go
on out.

But what dogged determination on his part - since we know
that it's only a consideration in the first place - what
dogged determination on his part to continue to insist that
these things all acknowledge him. Do you see that? You
might say he stays batty to the end. But eventually he'll
kind of change his mind on the subject and he'll say,
"Well, I didn't always - I can put up all the acknowledgments
I need, why do I have to have all these acknowledgments
from other units?" Well, the answer to that is it makes a
good game. And that's the only answer to it.

All right. Now, we get ourselves in games, and we find out
it requires two. But if we think this just applies to
games, we are overlooking the fact that life is a game gone
serious. And we always have to have a couple around in
order to have not just a game, but time. In order to have
any time at all we have to have two things around.

Now, you start this process, which is kind of what I'm
talking to you about, the single process, "Make some time."
And a guy will discover as he runs it what he has to
discover in order to actually make some time. And he will
start this and he will do that and so on, but as he runs it
- it's not a short process, it's a long one - he eventually
discovers exactly how to make some time and that moment
recovers the command of the body in which he is. It's kind
of fabulous. Kind of fabulous. But he all of a sudden
starts making time. The moment he starts making time, he
then has time in which to relay an order. Up to that moment
he is dependent on old masses and their times. See that?

8-C actually is a rather crude process for making time. The
individual does stand there and look at a wall. Spotting
spots does this too. He gets a spot out there, you see?

Now, there's only one reason really for all this and that's
one reason. You get the idea? One thought not acknowledged. 
Now, let's reduce this back down to its most absurd form. 
What is a nonacknowledged thought? It's one thought. You 
got this. A nonacknowledged thought is just one thought, 
isn't it? There wasn't another thought there to acknowledge 
it, was there? 

Female voice: No twos. 

Huh?

Female voice: No twos. 

No twos, that's right. And out of no twos you get mass. So 
that the whole study of mass is a study of an "only one" 
situation. It's the study of an unacknowledged thought.

Now, in view of the fact that a thetan can directly make
the postulate that mass will appear, then mass can also
exist that doesn't have this characteristic, but by golly,
it's got a thought in it - that it appeared. So it doesn't
violate this definition.

So we have the "only one" thinking one thought. Of course,
he had to be the one that thinks this one thought, huh?
Nobody else is going to think this thought, see, because he
thought this thought. And this doesn't get acknowledged,
so therefore he runs out of time, right that instant. And
if he thought a great thought or a big thought, he will
stick on the time track at the moment he thought it,
couldn't he? And it would be a mass right now, wouldn't it?

Now, just why we've gone seventy-six trillion years without
any recognition of the fact that our own "Okay" out there
is just as valuable as somebody else's "Okay," was it hard
to - what to say unless we just rig it this way to make a
good game. The game which avoids becoming an "only one" and
which resists becoming an "only one" winds one up as an
"only one."

So we have pantheons becoming monodeisms. We have all of
the motor car companies in the country becoming the Cartel
Motor Car Company. We have a two-party system becoming a
fascism sooner or later or communism or something - a
one-party system. The moment, however, that we merge
everything in the one we get a revolution. It would be a
lead-pipe cinch that sooner or later the communist regime
in Russia is going to be overthrown: (1) in a riot by
revolution against the one-party system, and (2) it had to
maintain itself with great ardure against two-party
countries. So it began to despise this type of political
action. And so we got ourselves a country here on Earth
which is trying to run things on a one-party system. It's
being the "only one."

Well, the only thing which really kept them from boiling
over was the fact that they get pretty distracted here and
there amongst the various republics in trying to keep down
the revolution.

The revolutions have been jumping up quite considerably.
There was a revolution down in the Ukraine a couple of
years ago; a real violent one. They were mowing people down
with machine guns in all directions. Stalin, to keep
himself in power, himself said that he had to kill ten
million peasants. So evidently it can be done, but it's
rather arduous. And I would say, to some slight degree,
hazardous. We have Herr Hitler on a rampage with a
one-party system, and it didn't last long. We have all
kinds of experiments in this direction of one-ism.

Now, you will find the thetan holds onto truth harder than
anything. He holds onto truth. He actually does not have
mass, meaning or mobility. And so, some sooner or later, at
no matter what point of inversion, you will find him
asserting that he doesn't have mass, meaning or mobility.

Let's take mobility. An individual, he starts getting bad
off; begins to reassert the fact that he actually doesn't
have mobility. He'll start to reassert this fact. And so a
thetan asserts, as he goes down the line, that there isn't
any universe, that all things occupy the same space. He'll
try to assert this reactively. Having created a universe,
he will try now to condense the whole universe. And this is
the action which we know as you inflow, piling things up
and so on.

Well, the solution to all this is get him in comm; get him
answered; get another spot out there and get some time.
There's quite a process in just making somebody put a spot
out there and make it think. Put a spot out there after
he's made it think, give him some orders. Put a spot out
there and have it make some time. Of course, he is making
time while he's doing just that. So we get sanity, as we
see it, existing in only two areas: no universe whatever or
in a well-ordered universe with spaces amongst terminals
and time flowing freely.

We just have two conditions here that are optimum
conditions: either no universe of any kind whatsoever, not
a scrap of energy or space to be seen in any direction, not
a single action or effort taking place of any kind
whatsoever or everything nicely spaced and things in good
order, separate and distributed and not piling all up in
one place. Now, any time we violate either of those two
conditions - which is an optimum spacing and positioning, or
no universe at all - we have an individual who conceives
himself to be in very desperate trouble indeed.

Now, this that I have talked to you about is actually the
background music of any life or livingness. And you as an
auditor can, I am sure, apply it with considerable benefit.

Okay.
Thank you.

(end of lecture)



